Cover not available
Article published In:
Translators’ and Interpreters’ Job Satisfaction
Edited by Minna Ruokonen, Elin Svahn and Anu Heino
[Translation Spaces 13:1] 2024
► pp. 54–77

Measuring translators’ quality of working life and their career motivation

Conceptual and methodological aspects

ORCID logo | Kansai University
ORCID logo | University of Portsmouth
ORCID logo | Dublin City University
ORCID logo | University of Surrey
This article discusses the conceptual and methodological aspects of the Translator WRQoL (Work-related Quality of Life) survey and provides some preliminary results and observations based on the first pilot study. The survey is being developed to measure translators’ work satisfaction and motivation in the context of job digitalisation and automation. Literature suggests that translators’ work satisfaction and their career motivation have been adversely affected. The survey being developed in this study intends to quantitatively measure the causes of the adverse effects using psychometric-strong scales. The ultimate goal is to administer the Translator WRQoL survey on a large scale, and using SEM (Structural Equation Modelling), to identify the causal relationships between the constructs measured by the scale and to determine what kind of translators (regarding worker profiles and attitudes to technology and other factors) have high/low levels of work-related quality of life and are more/less willing to stay in the profession.
Keywords: translators, language industry, work-related quality of life (WRQoL), work satisfaction, work motivation, translation technology, survey study, psychological scale development
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Translators’ work satisfaction and motivation – conceptual and methodological issues
    • 2.1The paradox
    • 2.2Methodological issues
    • 2.3Methodological enhancement using SEM (Structural Equation Modelling)
  • 3.The new T-WRQoL scale
    • 3.1The first component – Translators’ work-related quality of life
    • 3.2The second component – Translator-specific factors
      • New construct 1: Motivation to work (MOW)
      • New construct 2: Tech-Human symbiosis (THS)
      • New construct 3: Translator agency (TRA)
  • 4.The study
    • 4.1Aim
    • 4.2Questionnaire design
    • 4.3Participants and data collection
    • 4.4Data analysis, findings and discussion
      • The first-stage analysis
      • The second-stage analysis
      • Translators and technology
      • Long-term intention to work as a translator
      • Overall work satisfaction
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Bibliography
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 15 February 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.23026.sak
References (60)
Bibliography
Bednárová-Gibová, Klaudia. 2021. “Organizational Ergonomics of Translation as a Powerful Predictor of Translators’ Happiness at Work?” Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice 29 (3): 391–406. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Translated by Richard Nice. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Buzelin, Hélène. 2014. “How Devoted Can Translators Be?: Revisiting the Subservience Hypothesis.” Target 26 (1): 63–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Byrne, Barbara M. 2001. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Carmo, Félix do. 2020. “‘Time Is Money’ and the Value of Translation.” Translation Spaces 9 (1): 35–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, Wei-Chu, Siddharth Suri, and Mary L. Gray. 2019. “More Than Money: Correlation among Worker Demographics, Motivations, and Participation in Online Labor Market.” In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 131:134–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Courtney, Jennifer, and Mary Phelan. 2019. “Translators’ Experiences of Occupational Stress and Job Satisfaction.” Translation and Interpreting 11 (1): 100–113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dam, Helle V., and Karen Korning Zethsen. 2008. “Translator Status: A Study of Danish Company Translators.” The Translator 14 (1): 71–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. “Who Said Low Status? A Study on Factors Affecting the Perception of Translator Status.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 121: 2–36.Google Scholar
. 2010. “Translator Status: Helpers and Opponents in the Ongoing Battle of an Emerging Profession.” Target: International Journal on Translation Studies 22 (2): 194–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. “The Status of Professional Business Translators on the Danish Market: A Comparative Study of Company, Agency and Freelance Translators.” Meta 56 (4): 976–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “‘I Think It Is a Wonderful Job’ On the Solidity of the Translation Profession.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 251: 174–87.Google Scholar
Danna, Karen, and Ricky W. Griffin. 1999. “Health and Well-Being in the Workplace: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature.” Journal of Management 25 (3): 357–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeVellis, Robert F. 2017. Scale Development. Los Angeles: SAGE.Google Scholar
Easton, Simon, and Darren Van Laar. 2018. “User Manual for the Work-Ralated Quality of Life (WRQoL) Scale Second Edition.” [URL]
Easton, Simon, Darren Van Laar, and Rachel Marlow-Vardy. 2013. “Quality of Working Life and the Police.” Management 3 (3): 135–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Edwards, Julian A., Simon Webster, Darren Van Laar, and Simon Easton. 2008. “Psychometric Analysis of the UK Health and Safety Executive’s Management Standards Work-Related Stress Indicator Tool.” Work and Stress 22 (2): 96–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen. 2017. “An Ergonomic Perspective of Translation.” In An Ergonomic Perspective of Translation, edited by W. Schwieter and A. Ferreira, 332–49. John Wiley & Sons. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen, Andrea Hunziker Heeb, Gary Massey, Ursula Meidert, Silke Neumann, and Heidrun Becker. 2016. “An International Survey of the Ergonomics of Professional Translation.” Ilcea 271: 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fırat, Gökhan. 2021. “Uberization of Translation: Impacts on Working Conditions.” The Journal of Internationalization and Localization 8 (1): 48–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fontinha, Rita, Simon Easton, and Darren Van Laar. 2019. “Overtime and Quality of Working Life in Academics and Nonacademics: The Role of Perceived Work-Life Balance.” International Journal of Stress Management 26 (2): 173–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Janet, and Michael Gold. 2001. “‘Portfolio Workers’: Autonomy and Control amongst Freelance Translators.” Work, Employment & Society 15 (4): 679–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Funtowicz, Silvio O., and Jerome R. Ravetz. 1993. “Science for the Post-Normal Age.” Futures 25 (7): 739–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garcia, Ignacio. 2015. “Cloud Marketplaces: Procurement of Translators in the Age of Social Media.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 231: 18–38.Google Scholar
Gray, Mary L., and Siddharth Suri. 2019. Ghost Work. New York: Mariner.Google Scholar
Heino, Anu. 2017. “Contemporary Finnish Literary Translators and Symbolic Capital.” Ääniä, Röster, Voices, Stimmen. VAKKI-Symposiumi 37 (9): 52–63.Google Scholar
Herzberg, Frederick. 1959. The Motivation to Work. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Hickey, Sarah. 2023. “The 2023 Nimzi 100: The Ranking of the Top 100 Largest Language Service Providers.” 2023. [URL]
Hu, Ke, and Patrick Cadwell. 2016. “A Comparative Study of Post-Editing Guidelines.” Baltic Journal of Modern Computing 4 (2): 346–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Katan, David. 2009. “Occupation or Profession: A Survey of the Translators’ World.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 4 (2): 187–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keith, Melissa G., Peter Harms, and Louis Tay. 2019. “Mechanical Turk and the Gig Economy: Exploring Differences between Gig Workers.” Journal of Managerial Psychology 34 (4): 286–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kinnunen, Tuija, and Kaisa Koskinen. 2010. “Introduction.” In Translators’ Agency, 4–10. Tempera, Finland: Tampere University Press.Google Scholar
LeBlanc, Matthieu. 2017. “‘I Can’t Get No Satisfaction!’ Should We Blame Translation Technologies or Shifting Business Practices?” In Human Issues in Translation Technology, edited by Dorothy Kenny, 45–62. Florence, US: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Liu, Christy. 2013. “A Quantitative Enquiry into the Translator’s Job-Related Happiness: Does Visibility Correlate with Happiness?” Across Languages and Cultures 14 (1): 123–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Macey, William H., Karen M. Schneider, Benjamin Barbera, and Young, Scott A. 2011. Employee Engagement: Tools for Analysis, Practice, and Competitive Advantage. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Moor, Rob. 2008. “Capital.” In Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts, edited by Michael Grenfell, 98–113. Stockfiled: Acumen. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moorkens, Joss. 2017. “Under Pressure: Translation in Times of Austerity.” Perspectives 25 (3): 464–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020a. “‘A Tiny Cog in a Large Machine’ Digital Taylorism in the Translation Industry.” Translation Spaces 9 (1): 12–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020b. “Comparative Satisfaction among Freelance and Directly-Employed Irish-Language Translators.” The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research 12 (1): 55–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 2017. “Generic Job Stress Questionnaire.” [URL]
Nunziatini, Mara, and Lena Marg. 2020. “Machine Translation Post-Editing Levels: Breaking Away from the Tradition and Delivering a Tailored Service.” In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the European Association for Machine Translation, 309–18. Lisbora, Portugal: European Association for Machine Translation. [URL]
Olohan, Maeve. 2017. “Technology, Translation and Society.” Target 29 (2): 264–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pielmeier, Hélène, and Paul O’Mara. 2020. “The State of the Linguist Supply Chain.” [URL] “The State of the Linguist Supply Chain.”
Pym, Anthony, François Grin, Claudio Sfreddo, and Andy L. J. Chan. 2012. “The Status of the Translation Profession in the European Union.”. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez-Castro, Mónica. 2015. “Conceptual Construct and Empirical Validation of a Multifaceted Instrument for Translator Satisfaction.” Translation and Interpreting 7 (2): 30–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “Intrinsic and Extrinsic Sources of Translator Satisfaction: An Empirical Study.” Entreculturas 7–81: 195–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. “Critical Distinctions between Expert and Novice Translators: Task and Professional Satisfaction.” Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business 471: 123–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruokonen, Minna, and Kaisa Koskinen. 2017. “Dancing with Technology: Translators’ Narratives on the Dance of Human and Machinic Agency in Translation Work.” The Translator 23 (3): 310–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruokonen, Minna, and Jukka Mäkisalo. 2018. “Middling-Status Profession, High-Status Work: Finnish Translators Status Perceptions in the Light of Their Backgrounds, Working Conditions and Job Satisfaction.” Translation and Interpreting 10 (1): 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sakamoto, Akiko. 2018. “Unintended Consequences of Translation Technologies: From Project Managers’ Perspectives.” Perspectives 27 (1): 58–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. “Why Do Many Translators Resist Post-Editing? A Sociological Analysis Using Bourdieu’ s Concepts.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 311: 201–16.Google Scholar
. 2020. “The Value of Translation in the Era of Automation: An Examination of Threats.” In When Translation Goes Digital, edited by Renée Desjardins, Claire Larsonneur, and Philippe Lacour, 231–55. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sardar, Ziauddin. 2010. “Welcome to Postnormal Times.” Futures 42 (5): 435–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simeoni, Daniel. 1998. “The Pivotal State of the Translator’s Habitus.” Target 10 (1): 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Singh, Sanjay, and Yogita Aggarwal. 2018. “Happiness at Work Scale: Construction and Psychometric Validation of a Measure Using Mixed Method Approach.” Journal of Happiness Studies 19 (5): 1439–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sirgy, M Joseph, and Dong-Jin Lee. 2018. “Work-Life Balance: An Integrative Review.” Applied Research in Quality of Life 13 (1): 229–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spreitzer, Gretchen M., Lindsey Cameron, and Lyndon Garrett. 2017. “Alternative Work Arrangements: Two Images of the New World of Work.” The Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 41: 473–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svahn, Elin. 2020. “The Dynamics of Extratextual Translatorship in Contemporary Sweden: A Mixed Methods Approach (Doctoral Dissertation).” Department of Swedish Language and Miltililngualism, Stockholm University.
Vieira, Lucas Nunes. 2018. “Automation Anxiety and Translators.” Translation Studies 13 (1): 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar